Did Shakespeare write the plays?

[kelby_lake]

Before the Roman occupation (latin culture) english language was very poor. Abstract words (philosophical and theological concepts) didn't exist yet in english. Abstract words, concepts and thoughts from Greek-Roman world entered into english during the occupation and the christianization of England.

During the middle-ages, Rome, Florence, Venice, Genoa, Naples, Provence, Castile and León were were the sons of classical culture. They translated classical archetypes (from classical heritage) into a medieval context.

Portugal was the first European centralized country. They went to the sea make discoveries (new commercial routes). The Lusiads (by Camões) tells its history.

After so many wars, English people were poor and sad. They wanted for fun and a reason for smile.

Shakespeare translated some of the best texts from the middle-ages, from italian and french (languages and cultures directly influenced by the classical knowledge) to english (a practical and simple language). Shakespeare translated it in a practical and popular way, he built a spetacle, very popular at that time: the theatre. That because English people couldn't read. For his public, the plays were new, exciting, charming... He became popular.

He did a great work, but not new. His work was taken from the medieval italian and french texts (classical, but translated to medieval context). He simplified even more the texts and they became popular (among people without studies). Shakespeare is a kind of "best-seller". He discovered the formula of success: love, passion, treason, tragedie, death. On another hand, he discovered how to joy his public: make them laugh (comedies). Shakespeare is good, however, he is not as complex as the Greeks. Greek theatre was for the citiziens (a well-educated people). Shakespeare's plays was for the english people. He is not as great as Homer, Dante, Camões or Cervantes. Shakespeare stole great italian texts, that were based on classical stories, simplified it and made a big success among popular taste.

But I have to say. It's a great job! Shakespeare was great making classical becoming popular (easier to understand) and he made it in a simple language (english, the easiest grammar of Earth).

English is actually one of the hardest languages for grammar and Shakespeare's grammar is not the sort that we'd use today.

Are the anachronisms in the plays deliberate? For example, a clock strikes in Julius Caesar.

[Brasil]

English grammar today is easier than that one at the time of Shakespeare.

Greek, latin, german and romance languages are more complex. Language determines thought. The most complex grammar, most complex thought.

No english speaker can understand the complexity of Divine Comedy without understanding Dante's language. I tried to read it in italian (a bilingual version, italian/portuguese) and I studied the critics of Dante.

All critics agree: Dante's thought can't be translated to another language (even another romance language, but in english the text lost is bigger).


Another example is Machado de Assis (1839 - 1908). Look the time he wrote. All critics and professors agree: Machado de Assis can't be classified in any Literary School of 19th century.

Actually, Machados' work has all characteristics of postmodernism:
- Formal experimentation;
- Concern with the present;
- Hyper-realism;
- Fragmentation of the text (not chronological);
- Stream of consciousness (narrator reflects and speaks to the reader);
- Fantastic realism (a little);
- Hedonism (a few characters);
- The cult of superficiality (some characters);
- Lack of commitment to moral rules (some characters);
- Questioning the story.
And one additional element: a fine irony, very subtle.

(It would take a long time to explain. It's not so simple like this).
But the point is: Some Brazilian students in university level can read Shakespeare in english and understand it easier than they understand Machado in portuguese.
In addition, portuguese has "mesóclise", "voz passiva sintética", genres and other things that english doesn't have.

[xman]

After so many wars, English people were poor and sad. They wanted for fun and a reason for smile.

Your hypothesis is a bad one. You assume a hundred generations of misery leading up to Elizabethan drama. While misery was common in these times, it was no more true for England than elsewhere. Indeed because of its geographic isolation as an island it suffered less conquest than most parts of mainland Europe.

Shakespeare translated some of the best texts from the middle-ages, from italian and french (languages and cultures directly influenced by the classical knowledge) to english (a practical and simple language).

Again you are reaching a little. Shakespeare also used many English sources although you omit this. And English is no easy language to understand. With Norman, Saxon and many other influences over the years it grew to accommodate several forms including different words, spelling, conjugations and syntax from Latin, French and German mainly. By the time Shakespeare was using it it was richer and more complex than any of those individually. Shakespeare himself uses over 30,000 different words whereas the average English speaker has a vocabulary of about 10,000 words. Indeed, by some estimates he introduced as many as 1,700 into the language for the very first time and many of these words and phrases are now household words, including incidentally 'household words'.

Latin is far simpler than Shakespeare's English which is essentially our English and largely so because of him.

[Brasil]

... and syntax from Latin, French and German mainly.

I cant say for sure, but I think the syntax came from Low-German only.
Latin and French contribution was only vocabulary.

Now look some examples.
Morphology
Verbs:
I speak, he speaks, we speak, they speak
Eu falo, ele fala, nós falamos, eles falam

Genres:
The cat (english has no genre)
O gato (male), a gata (female)

Syntax:

Give-me, Don't give me, You would give me (noun always after verb)
Dê-me (ênclise)
Não me dê... (próclise)
Dar-me-ia (mesóclise)

[Davy Gam]

Shakespeare did write the Henry VI plays, but all the others were written by Ianto Pugh. Who? Well Ianto Pugh was a Welsh stand-up comic from Llanffunny who went to London to seek his fortune. There he met Will Shakespeare who, at that time, was suffering from writer`s block and Ianto, being the nice guy he was helps him out and produces such master works as "Alls Well In Taffs Well", "MacBethan", "Romeo & Blodwyn" and "The Coracle of Errors".

Don`t worry, this is not the posting of a lunatic, but it`s to inform you of a new play that may tickle your fancy, "Taffy Shakespeare" by Francis Hardy that opens at Swansea`s Grand Theatre on August 24th before touring. It`s a great comedy where historical fact flies out of the window. Google it to find out more

[shakeyourspeare]

I think Shakespeare did write the plays. Most of my knowledge is about Shakespeare's poetry.

The bit of evidence I'd like to give is that early on in Shakespeare's career he did started off writing long poems such as Venus and Adonis. But soon in I think 1599 he acquired a stake in the Globe theatre company and from then on he stopped writing poems and wrote many more plays, because it was much more profitable for him to do so.

In the end he only wrote 4 poems and 31 plays, and he wrote a lot more plays much more frequently after he acquired a stake in the globe theatre company, so it makes sense

[Hawkman]

I think Shakespeare did write the plays. Most of my knowledge is about Shakespeare's poetry.

In the end he only wrote 4 poems and 31 plays, and he wrote a lot more plays much more frequently after he acquired a stake in the globe theatre company, so it makes sense

Only 4 poems; what are all those sonnety things then?

[aoveran]

Personally, I think it's a lot of speculation .... No matter who the public figure is, there will always be theories that cast doubt on the "facts" as we know them to be in our textbooks. It seems you can find proof for almost anything, and that's the case now as much as several hundred years ago.

So was Shakespeare the real author? Maybe. Was he not the real author? Maybe. Who knows? All that matters in my mind is that we have some pretty kick-*** plays and sonnets and poems to read. And whether or not Shakespeare actually wrote them won't prevent me from enjoying them in the least.

[Thespian1975]

The fact that his friends and fellow actors got together and published the folio after Shakespeare had died and put his name on the cover is a big clue.
But as said above, it doesn't matter who shakespeare was. The play's the thing

[AllanAlbert]

Actually, we can't be sure that everyone whose name is on the First Folio wrote what is attributed to him. For instance, the evidence suggests that it was Ben Jonson who most likely wrote the parts attributed to Heminges and Condell. Ben Jonson is not known for sure to have been a close friend of William Shakspere, but certainly he knew him. On the other hand it is known that Jonson was a close friend of Francis Bacon and had worked with him on some of his publications and was working with him at the time Jonson helped with the publishing of the Shakespeare First Folio. There's a great deal of evidence, even many proofs, that show that Bacon was the actual author of the Shakespeare works. You won't find anyone who disputes this evidence. You can only find disputes of some of the bad evidence put out by some early Baconians of nearly a century ago or more. You can examine much of this good evidence here:
http://bacon-shakespeare-evidence.blogspot.com/
or here:
http://www.playshakespeare.com/forum...-and-apocrypha

[wessexgirl]

Actually, we can't be sure that everyone whose name is on the First Folio wrote what is attributed to him. For instance, the evidence suggests that it was Ben Jonson who most likely wrote the parts attributed to Heminges and Condell. Ben Jonson is not known for sure to have been a close friend of William Shakspere, but certainly he knew him. On the other hand it is known that Jonson was a close friend of Francis Bacon and had worked with him on some of his publications and was working with him at the time Jonson helped with the publishing of the Shakespeare First Folio. There's a great deal of evidence, even many proofs, that show that Bacon was the actual author of the Shakespeare works. You won't find anyone who disputes this evidence. You can only find disputes of some of the bad evidence put out by some early Baconians of nearly a century ago or more. You can examine much of this good evidence here:
http://bacon-shakespeare-evidence.blogspot.com/
or here:
http://www.playshakespeare.com/forum...-and-apocrypha

Just one word C***! That's a whopper of a lie, which is outrageous in its cheek. It seems to be founded on the (paraphrased) statement by Hitler (or was it Goebbels?) that if you're gonna tell a lie tell a big one. Hmm, centuries of scholarship dismissed with two lines about no-one disputing that Bacon was the author. RUBBISH.

[Emil Miller]

Just one word C***! That's a whopper of a lie, which is outrageous in its cheek. It seems to be founded on the (paraphrased) statement by Hitler (or was it Goebbels?) that if you're gonna tell a lie tell a big one. Hmm, centuries of scholarship dismissed with two lines about no-one disputing that Bacon was the author. RUBBISH.

Hi Wessex, how did I know that I would find you here? That's some paraphrase and I'm pretty sure there's no German equivalent for 'gonna'.
Here is what Hitler actually said in Mein Kampf where he attacks those who, as he put it, lied about Ludendorff being responsible for losing the war.

For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying.

[xman]

Oh stop it AllanAlbert, you're killing me.

... Ben Jonson is not known for sure to have been a close friend of William Shakspere, but certainly he knew him.

Except for the fact that they both wrote for the same company and engaged in a friendly rivalry through their works and that Johnson wrote the dedication in the folio. Here is a painting attributed to the Dutch master Karel van Mander showing the two men in a (non-literal) game of chess, created for the coronation ceremonies of King James I.



It would seem that universally at the time of their living, everyone knew of the relationship the two men had.

re. Bacon: You shouldn't swallow that stuff. http://shakespeareauthorship.com/

[Emil Miller]

Oh stop it AllanAlbert, you're killing me.


Except for the fact that they both wrote for the same company and engaged in a friendly rivalry through their works and that Johnson wrote the dedication in the folio. Here is a painting attributed to the Dutch master Karel van Mander showing the two men in a (non-literal) game of chess, created for the coronation ceremonies of King James I.

It would seem that universally at the time of their living, everyone knew of the relationship the two men had.

re. Bacon: You shouldn't swallow that stuff. http://shakespeareauthorship.com/

It's amusing that, however often the dead horse is beaten, it simply won't lie down.

[wessexgirl]

Hi Wessex, how did I know that I would find you here? That's some paraphrase and I'm pretty sure there's no German equivalent for 'gonna'.
Here is what Hitler actually said in Mein Kampf where he attacks those who, as he put it, lied about Ludendorff being responsible for losing the war.

For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying.

Actually, that's not the quote I was thinking of. It was Goebbels who said
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it". The "gonna" was purely my phrasing, I wasn't quoting the speech verbatim, as I think I stated by saying it was paraphrased. Anyway, you know my thoughts on the matter, as you imply by your opening line, and I stand by what I say, the proposition that Shakespeare didn't write the plays is garbage, pure and simple.